[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: guile-lib things

From: Linas Vepstas
Subject: Re: guile-lib things
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2004 16:43:07 -0500
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.4i

On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 01:31:29PM -0500, Rob Browning was heard to remark:
> Andy Wingo <address@hidden> writes:
> > [0] At one point, I wanted strictly taxonomic names for the
> > modules. I was wrong: code doesn't behave taxonomically, it behaves
> > in a certain quirky way depending on who wrote it / what package it
> > comes from. So while you might classify _packages_ a certain way,
> > the code often deserves to be classified under the package name
> > itself.  I'm thinking of (sxml htmlprag) here.
>   That said, I tend to prefer flatter namespaces for modules when
>   there's a choice.  For example, modules like (text regexp pcre), (db
>   relational sql postgresql), or even (graphics opengl) seem
>   unnecessary and even potentially confusing to me.

Yes!  Deep taxonomies also hinder authors who are working on
new stuff, which tends to cross boundaries: if it could be easily
classified, it would be a whole lot more boring, and maybe not
worth doing ....  For example, suppose you had to classify a blog 
tool, say 5 years ago.  What category would you have put it then?  
Is slashdot a blog or a news agregator?  Who knows? 


pub  1024D/01045933 2001-02-01 Linas Vepstas (Labas!) <address@hidden>
PGP Key fingerprint = 8305 2521 6000 0B5E 8984  3F54 64A9 9A82 0104 5933

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]